Do you think Sony A-mounts have a future?

I've always had a dumb fascination with the underdogs Sony so now that I'm considering going FF so switching systems from canon is a possibility since I'd have to sell off my old EF-S lenses.

Unfortunately, Sony can't seem to keep it together on mounts and little news I hear is about future FF Sony SLRs. the a7 is great but it seems to be aimed at the casual enthusiast rather than the professional. Are people who bought the old alphas kinda screwed?

You've asked the question that us Sony A-mount shooters have been asking ourselves. Sony has said repeatedly that A-mount is not dead. They released some updated A-mount lenses in the past year, a new Zeiss 50mm 1.4 lens too, and the A77mkii. But questions still remain, since they seem to be devoting so much effort to the E-mount ... especially the full-frame E-mount.

There's also plenty of buzz with the A7, A7r, and A7s. Sony really nailed these three cameras ... and no matter what the OP said, pro photogs seem to be more into these bodies than casual shooters.

I'd say that A-mount shooters are no more screwed than Canikon shooters who are considering switching over to the E-mount. All A-mount glass will work on the E-mount with an adaptor, just like other glass mounts.

The unknown question is, what else does Sony have up its proverbial sleeve? Sony is making a medium format sensor too ... do they plan on bringing that to the A-mount? Sony model nomenclature is the same as old Minolta cameras ... entry level models start with 3, midgrade start with 5, prosumer starts with 7, and pro with 9. So there's room for an A9, A9r, and A9s.

As an a99 owner, I really don't know where Sony will go with the a-mount. Right now I love my camera, but it's hard to believe I'll still be using SLT cameras in the future after this one.

The a55 was my first SLT. Back when the those first came out, SLT seemed like a really useful half-step between the DSLR and full mirrorless cameras. I loved my a55 so much that I sold all my Nikon gear. The SLT architecture let it offer much faster shooting than comparably priced DSLRs, a more informative viewfinder that always kept worked even when shooting video or reviewing shots, better TTL flash metering than mirrorless cameras, and fast phase-detect AF that was available even when shooting video, shooting stills in burst mode, or using live-view to compose shots. It had the controls and features you'd expect in a DSLR, and was only a little bigger than fully mirrorless NEX cameras. That was a niche that seemed perfect to me.

But now mirrorless cameras, and even Canon's newer DSLRs with dual-pixel AF on the sensors, can duplicate some of the neat tricks that use to require SLT architecture. It doesn't seem as if we need to stick with a design where you lose some of your light shooting through a translucent mirror. But, after SLT, where would a-mount go? Would you go fully mirrorless, with a big empty space in the middle of each camera because the flange depth of the a-mount lenses requires that distance between the lens and the sensor, even if there's no mirror there? Would you go "dual mount" and make something that took e-mount or a-mount lenses? How much better could a dual-mount camera be compared to an e-mount camera with an optional adapter?

I think the step is completely mirrorless, yes. Autofocus isn't quite there yet ... but soon it will be. I'll be looking forward to that day, and I'm never going back to an optical viewfinder.

There is an advantage to the size of the A77 and A99, especially with longer lenses. I don't mind the heft at all.

Thinking about the future ... Sony blew things up with the E-mount, allowing pretty much any brand of DSLR lenses to use the camera with an adaptor. Great business decision. Sony also makes a medium format sensor, used in the new camera bodies released this year. Could they do the same thing with medium format? Have its base be the A-mount, but open it up for adaptors for medium format mounts? No inside info, just wondering.

Medium format is so much bigger than full frame that you'd need different lenses. Not only could a-mount lenses not create a big enough image circle, the mount itself is a smaller hole in the front of the camera than you'd need if you were going to adapt and mount medium-format lenses.

There's nothing wrong with my a99 that would stop me from using it. Most of the size/weight comes from the Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8 lens that I have on the camera most of the time, and nothing like that is available for FE. I might look seriously at an a99 ii if/when that comes out because the a99 is lacking modern features like wifi support, high-bitrate video, and automatic enlargement of the image when you start to manually focus. At the same time I'm reluctant to invest too much more in a format with an uncertain road-map even over the next few years. Someday I expect to get a smaller, lighter camera so there's less to lug around, but I don't know what that'll be, or which compromises I'd be prepared to make compared to the set-up I currently use.

I shoot alot in the dark too which the sony has trouble focusing in, I need the full frame but don't have $3k to spend on a sports FF camera unless a crap ton more sports work starts coming in(hopefully).

Action + in the dark or limited lighting + less FPS(even if 1.5;20+% less) + plus flash in the other hand(manual focus with peaking impossible) sometimes= Not acceptable.

My impression is that the A7 has poor battery life on one battery, but pretty good battery life with the grip. If you need lenses right now, you can get A lenses and use Sony's adapter. Should get the same AF performance.

That being said, the sony FE-mount 'ecosystem' isn't very mature and there's no way of knowing how long sony will support it. The canon lens catalog already exists.

They're going to keep making the lenses and bodies for as long as people are buying them. There's a new A99 in the works that will be coming out eventually, and a new A77 just released. They're not focussing on A mount for sure, but it's not dead just yet either.

At least for the moment, the only way to get stabilisation on an A mount lens is with an A mount camera - E mount cameras don't do that. It will also be a good few years until E mount lenses cover what A mount already do, and that's assuming no new A mount lenses ever come out.

Full frame E mount is getting all the love at the moment because it's starting from scratch, and even with the recent lens releases there are still big holes in the line-up.

Maybe in 5 years they'll stop releasing new products, and 7-8 years down the line they'll stop manufacturing them, who knows. But those lenses will always have life through the LA-EA4 adapter, and right now my favourite combination is the A mount 135mm f1.8 on the A7 and I can't see that changing any time soon.

The A7s is soooooo tempting to me. I've done the math to see how much it would cost me to completely switch over from A-mount to E-mount. I have the Zeiss 85 1.4 which I adore, but for the 135 length I use the STF lens ... I can't imagine that lens is a priority to switch over to the E-mount. But man, that A7s ...

That's what the LA-EA4 is for. I have the other 135mm, and it works great on my A7. That's the good thing for you staying in-brand, you can fully or partially transition as fast or slow as you want. If you were moving from Canon or Nikon it would be a lot harder.

I doubt "screwed" is the right idea... There are tons of a-mount lenses of various ages and qualities, and plenty of them are really excellent. There are tons of good a-mount bodies too. Some of the full frame ones like the a900 suffer from relatively poor low-light performance, but are still fully capable cameras.

Even if sony stopped producing a-mount stuff today, which I really doubt they would, it would take years or decades before the landscape dried up, and indeed, it would actually be beneficial for the more core fans of the A-mount stuff, because as people dumped their gear, there'd be tons of it available for people who want it.

One of my favorite local photographers uses an A900 with some minolta 24/50/85 primes, and takes absolutely fantastic photos with it. I saw a deal on that body, with two lenses, for $1000 even once... if I was in the market for a new system then, I would have snapped that up in an instant.

Even if sony stopped producing a-mount stuff today, which I really doubt they would, it would take years or decades before the landscape dried up, and indeed, it would actually be beneficial for the more core fans of the A-mount stuff, because as people dumped their gear, there'd be tons of it available for people who want it.

It will be great in a few years, you could pick up old sony alpha stuff for next nothing. However, newer bodies will likely have advanced significantly by then.

the a900 is still decent but I'm sure the high iso performance is no where near as good as bodies produced 5+ years later.

a99 prices on ebay are dropping and sony hasn't even bothered mentioning new a-mount lenses at photokina.

I use to have a AF Minolta camera and I really did like it. And I did sell it in 2009.

When I wanted to get into video I was thinking about Sony A99 and Panasonic GH2 and Canon for video.

The point I'm trying to make is Minolta was always small compared to Nikon and Canon and the same for Sony A-Mount and even Micro 4.3. As long as there is a market to support the A-Mount it will always be here. Just look at Pentax.

Many years ago, I used to take out my dates to the top of a building overlooking a city. I told the girls to always bring camera.

One very beautiful but a bit strange girl brough out the biggest DSLR I've ever seen....a minolta! It was like a desert eagle and she looked like the baddest photographer I ever saw holding that bazooka.

Most of the time when I'm out with my camera people come up and ask my to take their photo. Most of the time its a Canon, Nikon or a cellphone. A few times I've seen people walking around with a Micro 4.3 or a Sony Nex. I did see Canon mirrorless camera out in the wild once.

I have no idea what is coming, but I personally would not bet on the A mount having much of a future. The FE cameras are already pretty good, and with a generation or two of improvements will likely outperform the current Alpha DSLRs easily. They are cheaper to produce, and the prices will likely come down a bit, which will help make them more popular. You can already get a mint condition A7 for 1000 USD used.

That said, I am not sure that FE is a sure bet, either. We don't really know if AF performance will improve any time soon (especially if the lenses are the issue), we don't know if Sony will improve the UI and make the cameras more responsive, we don't know if any of the announced lenses will ever even make it to the market. I am assuming yes to all of these, but I am also assuming that anything that Sony sells now remains as-is; don't expect Fuji-like firmware updates that make everything better. I will remain cautiously optimistic about the FE mount.

Putting any resources into A mount development (cameras or lenses) is a waste for Sony. They have a product that is fairly disruptive in the FE line, and it could be extremely disruptive if they could get it to current-DSLR-level handling and AF performance, especially while matching or beating prices. The cool thing is this is actually possible. I personally don't think we need 4+ DSLR manufacturers with essentially identical line-ups. Sony has always been a smaller player, and the unique features they offered in the DSLR/SLT space weren't enough to change that. If I were buying a new system from scratch, I would not consider A mount for more than a moment. Why lock yourself into a system that is more expensive, less complete, and less popular than what Canon and Nikon have? The FE line is much more appealing, as it offers something that is currently unique.

My biggest problem with Sony is their infatuation with proprietary formats. If they had their way, only Sony accessories would work with Sony products. I won't even consider them until they start using standard hot-shoes and get rid of the joke that is a memory stick duo slot which, judging by their other products, won't happen in a million years.

It's a slot for regular SD cards. Yes, they still support Sony memory sticks if you happen to have one and they'll fit in that slot too, but if you don't own any of those you'd never notice anything but the fact that it's a slot for your SD card.

Yep. I looked at the specs of the a7s on B&H, which stated SD and MSD, so I assumed there were separate slots for each. I assumed the Sony flagship had two card slots, which turned out not to be the case.

The a99 has 2 SD card slots (technically they can take Sony MS or standard SD, but I never tried them with a memory stick.)

But all I've ever used the 2nd slot for personally is storing an extra memory card, so I always have an extra one with me. If I end up upgrading to a Sony a7-type camera at some point I don't think I'll miss the 2nd slot.

I assumed the a7 had two card slots, one of which took only sd and another only memory stick, hence my comment regarding the waste of a slot. It was more about forcing proprietary formats than utility, as I wouldn't need a second slot either.

With that and the standard hot shoe, Sony seems to be shaping up. Now if only they could do something about their massive losses.

A-mount cameras have sensor stabilization, there is no alternative if you want FF and SS... anyway if Sony abandon A-mount this will show they are just gadget company and no professional should even trust them with anything.

/r/photography is a place to discuss the tools, technique and culture of photography.
This is not a good place to simply share cool photos or promote your work, but rather a place to discuss photography as an art and post things that would be of interest to other photographers.

Posting images is only allowed as self-post, and only when the intent is to start a discussion or to ask a photography-related question (using the photo as an example for the discussion, linked within the text of the self-post). If you just want to share an image or get critique, use subreddits like /r/pics, /r/itookapicture, and /r/photocritique. If you want to share some film photos you've taken or are looking for some solid film-related discussion, check out /r/analog.

Questions asking for help (including equipment purchasing advice) should be posted as comments in the most recent Official Question thread, stickied at the top of the subreddit. Before posting, please check our extensive FAQ, your question may already have been answered! When seeking purchase recommendations, please be specific about how much you can spend. (See here for guidelines.)

Interesting discussion questions on broader topics may be permitted as self posts at the discretion of the moderators. If you do not wish to post your simple questions to the Official Questions thread we cordially invite you to post your question to r/askphotography, they love questions as standalone posts!

Want to talk about some fun or interesting projects you're working on? Got some new (or new-to-you) gear you want to share? Looking to bounce some ideas off of other people for things you want to try? Post in the most recent Community Discussion thread.

If you want to sell a photography item to redditors or want to buy a photography item from a redditor, please use /r/photomarket.